MATEC Web of Conferences 192, 02008 (2018)

https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819202008
ICEAST 2018

Causes of construction delay from contractors and suppliers in

Thailand’s oil and gas platform projects
Pittayaporn Gomarn1,*, and Jakrapong Pongpeng1
1Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Bangkok, Thailand

Abstract. Construction project delays caused by contractors and suppliers are the top problems in
Thailand’s oil and gas industries. Recognizing this importance and their relationships between factors can
help reduce the risk of delays in construction projects. Therefore, this study set out to confirm factors and
inspect relationships between delay factors of contractors and suppliers. A 16 item questionnaire survey was
distributed to 134 managers, engineers, and supervisors in oil and gas platform construction projects in
Thailand. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed by the use of Amos Version 20 software
program. The analysis results showed that delays caused by the contractors and suppliers had high
relationships, due to high regression weighs. The delays caused by the contractors included seven factors
which included poor site management and supervision (17%), lack of safety rules and regulations (16%),
poor communication and coordination with others (15%), poor procurement system management (15%),
defective components and mistakes during construction (14%), supplier payments lateness (13%), and poor
planning and scheduling (10%). The delays caused by the suppliers included six factors which included the
supply of unqualified and unskilled personnel (22%), supply of low efficiency equipment (20%), late
delivery of materials and equipment (20%), supply of low quality materials (16%), late supply of workers
(16%), and price escalation (5%).

1 Introduction contractor project planning and scheduling (83.9%), poor

Over the years, construction project delays cast a dark
shadow over many construction projects, with the most
important being caused by the stakeholders.
Confirmation of this has come from Fallahnejad, which
reported that in many countries (including Iran), delays
caused by contractors and suppliers are in the top 10
reasons for delay in the oil and gas industry [1].
Ruqaishi and Bashir [2] also indicated that poor site
management and contractor supervision (such as
ineffective planning and scheduling) are the main causes
of the oil and gas construction projects delays in Oman.
In Malaysia, the most important causes are reported to
also be planning and scheduling, and contractor site
management [3].
In Jordan construction projects, evidence shows that
contractor financial difficulties are common causes of
project delays [4]. Assaf and Al-Hejji [5] conducted a
site survey of 23 contractors in Saudi Arabia to
determine the causes of delays, and found that 76% of
the most common causes come from contractor
difficulties in financing, poor site management, poor
communication, poor planning and scheduling, and
improper construction methods.
This is supported by Aziz [6], which surveyed post-
revolution construction project delays in private, public,
and local general construction firms. Results showed that
significant contributing factors include ineffective
site management and supervision (83.8%), poor site
financial control (82.3%), and reworks due to errors
(82.1%). Another survey result from Jordan indicated
that construction projects delays were often caused by
financing and payments [7].
Doloi and others [8] studied 45 key factors affecting
project delays in the Indian construction industry.
Results indicated that the most critical factors were lack
of commitment (11.6%), which included a lack of safety
measures and the use of improper or obsolete
construction methods. Second was inefficient site
management (10.9%), which included poor site
management and supervision. Third, was improper
planning (10.8%), which included lateness in materials
procurement), and finally, lack of communication
(8.6%).
In Thailand, construction delays often mean time and
cost overruns. Ogunlana and Promkuntong [9] explored
delays of high-rise building projects in Bangkok, and
found that most delays could be tracked back to
problems caused by contractors and suppliers. The main
reasons stated for these delays by contractors were
materials management problems (75%), coordination
deficiencies (67%), and planning and scheduling
problems (58%). Delays by suppliers were related to late
delivery (41%), price escalation (16%), and supply of
low quality materials (8%).

*
Corresponding author: gomarnp@gmail.com
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
MATEC Web of Conferences 192, 02008 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819202008
ICEAST 2018

Given both the financial importance caused by delays
and the fact that project delays can contribute to site
safety issues. However, the oil and gas platform
construction projects and general construction projects
have a different contractual project delivery system.
Therefore, researchers wanted to survey and study delay
causes and factors in Thailand’s oil and gas platform
construction projects caused by contractors and
suppliers. The results of this study can be applied in the
risk assessment analysis, and help with the prevention
and reduction of project delays.
2 Research methods
2.1 The conceptual framework
From a review of the literature, Table 1 is used to present
the primary reasons for construction project delays by
contractors and suppliers.
Table 1. Cause of project delay from contractor and supplier
factors.
2.3 The research instrument
To analyse the observed factors and inspect the
relationships between the latent factors, a 5-level, Likert
type agreement survey was used for data collection.
Part 1 of the questionnaire contained items related to
the individual’s position level, experience and project
value. Part 2 of the survey asked the individual to
evaluate the importance level of the cause of project
delay from contractors and suppliers on a Likert type
scale from 1 to 5, with “1” indicating the importance
level of the item as very low, whereas a “5” rated the
importance level of the item as very high [10].
2.4 Content and construct validity
2.4.1 Content validity
The questionnaire was discussed with three experts (the
experts are working as suppliers and contractors in the
offshore oil and gas industry with experiences more than
fifteen years) to ensure content validity.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] 2.4.2 Construct validity
* * * * * * * * *
The Spearman Rank Correlation was used to ensure
C1** x x x x x x x construct validity of the questionnaire. The correlation
coefficient is a measure of the relationship between
C2** x x x x x x x factors from a -1 to a +1 [11]. In this study, the observed
factors were determined to be correlated.
C3** x x x x Cronbach’s alpha was also used to test the internal
consistency (reliability) of the questionnaire. The criteria
C4** x x x x x x x value of Cronbach’s alpha is suggested to be above 0.7
[12]. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.866
C5** x x x x is determined.
C6** x x x x x x x
3 Results
C7** x x x x

S1** x x
3.1 Respondent’s characteristics
A total of 134 questionnaires were returned from the
S2** x x x x x x respondents having experienced in oil and gas platform
construction projects in Gulf of Thailand. Of these 4.5%
S3** x x x x were managers, 67.2% were engineers, and 28.4% were
supervisors (Table 2). Experience level responses
S4** x x x x indicated that 41.8% had 5-10 years’ experience. Also,
36.6% worked in enterprises valued at over 1 billion
S5** x x x x
Thai baht ($31.4 million).
S6** x x x x x
3.2 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
*References and **contractor (C) and supplier (S) factors
A CFA was used to analyze and confirm the sets of
observed factors and relationships between the latent
2.2 Panel of experts
factors by using the IBM® SPSS® Amos™ 20 software
This research was discussed with three experts to define program. Fit of the CFA model included the indices Chi-
and finalize factors from the literature review, from squares’s p-value, relative chi-square (χ2=df), goodness-
which, Table 1 was created as a summary of the related of-fit index (GFI), and the root mean square error of
factors. Additionally, the observed factors were finalized approximation (RMSEA). [13, 14] The criteria and index
into two classification groups related to contractors (C) values of the goodness-of-fit (GOF) are presented in
and suppliers (S). Table 3.

2
MATEC Web of Conferences 192, 02008 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819202008
ICEAST 2018

Table 2. Demographic characteristic from suppliers, as the regression weight was 0.78.
Information suggests that this is due to the majority of
Position level Quantity Percent the suppliers and subcontractors have to work under the
main contractors due to financial capability and
Manager level 6 4.5% production capacity of the project’s requirements.
Therefore, any supplier mistakes and delays directly
Engineer level 90 67.2% affect contractors. These include items such as the
supply of low quality materials, low efficiency of
Supervisor level 38 28.4% equipment, and unqualified and unskilled personnel to
the contractor. Meanwhile, any delays caused from
Experience Quantity Percent contractors affect suppliers also. These include poor
supplier communication and coordination, and contractor
Less than 5 years 28 20.9% late payments to suppliers.

5–10 years 56 41.8% e1 C1 0.40

11–15 years 30 22.4% e2 C2 0.60

More than 15 years 20 14.9% e3 C3 0.58

Delays
Project value Quantity Percent e4 C4 0.67 caused by
0.63 contractor
e5 C5 0.57
Less than 100 million THB 27 20.1%
e6 C6 0.51
100 – 500 million THB 17 12.7%
e7 C7
501 – 1000 million THB 41 30.6%
0.78
More than 1 billion THB 49 36.6%

e8 S1 0.20
3.3 Data analysis
e9 S2 0.76
Table 3 shows the results of the goodness-of-fit (GOF)
criteria and recommended index values. e10 S3 0.64 Delays
Table 3. Goodness-of-fit criteria and indices. 0.86 caused by
e11 S4 supplier
0.64
CFA* e12 S5 0.79

GOF recommended Relationship e13 S6

index values between
Contractor Supplier
contractor
Fig. 1. CFA results.
and supplier
Table 4 shows the factor loadings for delays caused
0.05 < p ≤ 1.00 0.055 0.050 0.077 by construction project contractor, with poor site
management and supervision being the leading cause for
delay.
0 ≤ χ2/df ≤ 2 1.668 1.936 1.280
Table 5 shows the factor loadings for delays caused
by the construction project supplier, with the supply of
0.09 ≤ GFI ≤ 1.00 0.952 0.964 0.930 unqualified and unskilled personnel being the number
one reason for delay.
Normally, in construction projects, a key element is
0 ≤ RMSEA ≤ 0.08 0.071 0.084 0.046
management’s knowledge and experience. If however
key personnel within the organization lack the required
*Remarks: The delay factor of price escalation (S1) was
removed from the supplier factors, because S1 does not project management knowledge, experience, and
significantly results delays from the supplier. supervisory skills, projects will have a much higher
probability of experience a delay and possibility even a
Fig.1 shows the CFA analysis results of the factors project’s failure. Also, if the suppliers assign and supply
and their relationships between contractor and supplier unqualified and unskilled personnel to the project
delay causes. The results indicated that the delay causes organization and team, those projects also have a high
from contractors has a high correlation with delay causes chance of delay and failure also.

3
MATEC Web of Conferences 192, 02008 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819202008
ICEAST 2018

Table 4. Factor loading of delays causes by the contractor.
Regression
Project delay causes
weights
C1: Poor planning and
scheduling
C2: Poor communication and
coordination with others
C3: Poor procurement system
management
C4: Poor site management and
supervision
C5: Lack of safety rules and
regulations
C6: Defective material and
mistakes during
construction
C7: Late payments to suppliers
communication and coordination with others, poor
procurement system management, defective components
Factors and mistakes during construction, late payments to
suppliers, and poor planning and scheduling,
loading
respectively.
The delays caused by suppliers in construction
0.40 10% projects are the supply of unqualified and unskilled
personnel, supply of low efficiency equipment, late
delivery of materials and equipment, supply of materials
0.60 15% of low quality, late supply of workers, respectively. In
addition, price escalation had a low impact on project
delay from supplier’s causes.
0.58 15% Finally, this analysis points to the key factors that
have been confirmed and the relationship between the
delays caused by the contractors and the suppliers.
0.67 17% These results may help to reduce and prevent delay risk
in ongoing and future oil and gas platform construction
projects. Furthermore, the project controller should take
0.63 16% a stronger role in evaluating contractors and suppliers in
the project’s prequalification phase and additionally
monitor projects during the execution phase.
0.57 14% The results of this study should be defined with a
limitations as the conceptual framework was developed
based on the experts experience and an international
0.51 13% literature review. Therefore, further inspection of the
project types is required.

Table 5. Factor loading of delays causes by the supplier. References

1. M.H. Fallahnejad, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 31(1), 136–
Regression Factors 146 (2013)
Project delay causes
weights loading
2. M. Ruqaishi, H.A. Bashir, J. Manag. Eng. 31(3), 1–
8 (2015)
S1: Price escalation 0.20 5%
3. M. Sambasivan, Y.W. Soon, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 25
(5), 517–526 (2007)
S2: Late delivery of materials
0.76 20% 4. G. Sweis, R. Sweis, A. Abu Hammad, A. Shboul,
and equipment
Int. J. Proj. Manag. 26 (6), 665–674 (2008)
S3: Supply of low quality 5. S.A. Assaf, S. Al-Hejji, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 24 (4),
0.64 16%
materials 349–357 (2006)
6. B.R. Aziz, Alexandria Eng. J. 52, 387–406 (2013)
S4 :Supply of unqualified
0.86 22% 7. A.M. Odeh, H.T. Battaineh, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 20
and unskilled personnel
(1), 67–73 (2002)
S5: Late supply of workers 0.64 16% 8. H. Doloi, A. Sawhney, S. Rentala, Int. J. Proj.
Manag. 30 (4), 479–489 (2012)
S6: Supply of low efficiency 9. S.O. Ogunlana, K. Promkuntong, V. Jearkjirm, Int.
0.79 20% J. Proj. Manag. 14 (1), 37–45 (1996)
equipment
10. R. Likert, Social psychology: Experimentation,
Remarks: S1 does not significantly indicate delays from the theory, research (Intext, Scranton, PA, 1972)
supplier (p-value < 0.05).
11. SPSS Training Department, Survey research using
SPSS. (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, 1998)
4 Conclusion 12. J. Nunnally, Psychometric theory (McGraw-Hill.
New York, 1967)
From the use and analysis of a CFA on contractor and
supplier delay factors, it was determined that there is a 13. J.L. Arbuckle, IBM SPSS amoss 20 user’s guide
significant relationship between the sets of factors. (IBM Corporation. U.S.A., 2011)
The major reasons for delays from contractors in 14. K. Schermelleh-Engell, H. Moosbrugger, Meths.
construction projects are poor site management and Psych. Resea. 8 (2), 23-74 (2003)
supervision, lack of safety rules and regulations, poor